The American Spectator : The Spectacle Blog : End Earmarks, Plug the Pork, Stop the Spending

Text Size

The Spectacle Blog

End Earmarks, Plug the Pork, Stop the Spending

8.13.10 @ 4:10PM

MEMO FOR THE MOVEMENT

Congress Should Slow the Spending, End the Earmarks and Plug the Pork

RE: Clearly, the practice of putting thousands of earmarks in spending bills, many for projects of a purely local nature, did not originate with the Founding Fathers-it is a recent phenomenon. Congress never extensively earmarked until the 1990s; it is neither necessary nor traditional to buy elections with pork.

“…federal money should be limited to great national works only, since if it were unlimited it would liable to abuse and might be productive of evil.”

—President James Monroe, 1822

“Earmarking” is not just the normal legislative process or Congress using its “power of the purse.” The term “earmark” does not attach to every Congressional funding decision. Earmarking is a phenomenon whereby legislators direct pork barrel spending to their districts outside of a statutory formula-driven or competitive award process for a federal program. The growth in earmarking has directly coincided with the growth in government.

ACTION:

In an effort to encourage more members of Congress and candidates for office to kick the earmarking habit, the Council for Citizens Against Government Waste (CCAGW) has launched a new no-gimmicks, anti-pork pledge. By signing CCAGW’s No Pork Pledge, incumbents and candidates vow not to request any pork-barrel earmark that violates any of the seven criteria contained in the annual Congressional Pig Book.

ISSUE-IN-BRIEF:

In 1970, there were 12 earmarks in the defense spending bill. In 2010, there were 1,752 earmarks. The first federal aid-highway bill in 1916 had zero earmarks; the bill to create the Interstate Highway System in 1956 had two projects suggested by members of Congress. President Reagan vetoed a surface transportation bill in 1986 when it had 152 earmarks worth $1 billion, while the most recent highway authorization bill in 2005 had more than 6,300 earmarks worth $24.5 billion, including the infamous Bridge to Nowhere.

SOME EARMARK “CLASSICS” ARE UNFORGETABLE:

* $7.3 million for grasshopper research in North Dakota-FY1999

· $1 million for a DNA study of bears in Montana-FY2003

* $50,000 for a tattoo removal program in California-FY2002

CITIZENS ORGANIZATIONS LEAD EFFORT ON EARMARK REFORM:

In addition to CCAGW a board cross section of grassroots organizations have been outspoken in support of earmark reform including: Americans for Tax Reform, National Taxpayers Union, FreedomWorks, Americans for Prosperity and Liberty Coalition.

HOUSE REPUBLICANS TAKE LEAD IN EARMARK REFORM:

* The March 2010 House Republican Conference unilateral moratorium on all earmarks has had a significant impact on the FY 2011 appropriations bills reducing the overall number and cost of earmarks in the bill and increasing spending transparency -but with spending still out of control, more is needed.

· The Transportation, Housing and Urban Development (THUD) and Related Agencies Appropriations bill is regularly one of the most heavily earmarked appropriations bills. The FY 2011 contains 459 earmarks-453 of which (or 99.3 percent) were requested by Democrats.

· In the eight FY 2011 bills that have been reported out of the House Appropriations subcommittees to date, there has been a 47.8 percent decrease in the number of projects and a 29 percent decrease in the cost of earmarks, for a total savings to taxpayers of $801.5million in pork

PELOSI DEMOCRATS MARRIED TO EARMARKS:

· While Republicans have sworn off earmark requests and firmly support reforming the earmarking process, Democrats have sworn off of only for-profit earmarks and have refused to consider any additional earmark reforms

· Some politicians have gotten quite creative in getting around their own earmark moratorium. Rep. Marcy Kaptur (D-Ohio) was named Porker of the Month after she requested a $10.4 million earmark for fiscal year 2011 for the Great Lakes Research Center, a nonprofit organization that specializes in the same kind of work, has the same officers, and operates out of the same location as a for-profit company.

CONSERVATIVE ACTION PROJECT

Tom Schatz, President, Council for Citizens Against Government Waste

Duane Parde, President, National Taxpayers Union

Grover Norquist, President, Americans for Tax Reform

Matt Kibbe, President, FreedomWorks

Karen Kerrigan, President, Small Business & Entrepreneurship Council

William Wilson, President, Americans for Limited Government

Dr. Herbert London, President, Hudson Institute

Wendy Wright, President, Concerned Women for America

Bob McEwen, former Member of Congress, Ohio

James C. Miller III, former Reagan Budget Director

Virginia Thomas, President, Liberty Central

Colin Hanna, President, Let Freedom Ring

Donna Hearne, Executive Director, Constitutional Coalition

Gary Bauer, President, American Values

Mathew D. Staver, Founder & Chairman, Liberty Counsel

Tony Perkins, President, Family Research Council

David N. Bossie, President, Citizens United

Alfred Regnery, Publisher, American Spectator

Jordan Marks, Executive Director, Young Americans for Freedom

Brent Bozell, President, Media Research Center

James Martin, Chairman, 60 Plus Association

Herman Cain, President, The NEW Voice, Inc.

Richard Viguerie, Chairman, ConservativeHQ.com

(All organizations listed are for identification purposes only)

FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON EARMARKS PLEASE VISIT THESE WEBSITES:

http://www.cagw.org/ccagw/congressional-candidates-sign.html

http://www.cagw.org/newsroom/waste-watcher/2010/july/

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704131404575117783044886468.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_AboveLEFTTop

http://www.taxpayer.net/search_by_category.php?action=view&proj_id=3192&category=Earmarks&type=Project

http://rsc.tomprice.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=131315

http://congress.blogs.foxnews.com/2010/03/16/senators-turn-away-from-one-year-earmark-ban/

http://www.redstate.com/erick/2010/03/01/no-more-earmarxists/

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703734504575125930444707958.html

http://www.cagw.org/reports/pig-book/2010/

http://rsc.tomprice.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=180908

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0310/34541.html

http://www.gop.gov/blog/10/03/11/house-republicans-unilaterally-ban-all

http://www.cagw.org/newsroom/releases/2010/ccagw-praises-gop-for-all-out.html

http://www.redstate.com/senator_jim_demint/2010/03/11/democrats-are-weaseling-out-on-earmarks/

http://rsc.tomprice.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=175593

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/05/us/politics/05earmarks.html

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/coburn-introduces-earmark-reform-bill-response-obama-sotu-call

http://thehill.com/homenews/house/86369-house-republicans-seek-to-trump-dems-on-earmark-reform

http://motherjones.com/mojo/2009/04/john-murtha-airport-earmark-reform-poster-child

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0410/36175.html

http://www.govexec.com/dailyfed/0310/031110cdam1.htm

http://www.atr.org/atr-supports-goodlatte-earmark-moratorium-a4826

http://earmarkpledge.com

http://www.ntu.org/news-and-issues/government-reform/earmarks/ending-earmark-express-road-to-reform.html

http://www.libertycentral.org/house-republicans-swear-off-earmarks-2010-05

Oldefarte| 8.15.10 @ 10:46AM

Congressmen should not only cease and decist pork barrel spending, but also any/all spending that canoot be proven to be toward the overall public good. These morons are for the most part ROBIN HOOD TYPE THIEVES that use the credit card of the taxpayers to pay for/provide governmental largess to their indigent constituents so that same will vote for them in quid-pro-quo fashion. They either don't realize [doubtful] or don't care that SOMEONE HAS TO PAY FOR THEIR CORRUPT SPENDING OF TAXPAYERS' MONEY. These morons should be forced to pledge to spend the taxpayers' money wisely [and if it were their own funds] and, if they do not, THEN THEY SHOULD BE TRIED BY THEIR FELLOW CONGRESSMEN [OR IN A COURT OF LAW], CONVICTED AND SENT TO JAIL FOR STEALING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Nate| 8.15.10 @ 12:40PM

It seems to me that one of the few issues liberals and conservatives could agree is that the process surrounding earmarks -- which both parties do with wild abandon -- is fishy and tends not to inspire confidence in the integrity of Congress.

I think, however, it's wrong to lump earmarks together with ALL spending, as though one is just a version of the other.

"Pork" is generally what Congressman of the other party bring back to their districts.

Congress spends money. We are a huge, populous, powerful, wealthy, world power. The government can and must and will spend money. There's nothing inherently wrong with government spending.

Recently many Republicans -- rightly, to my mind -- have criticized Obama for defunding several ambitious programs at NASA. These programs, Republicans have reminded us, are not just beneficial to space exploration.

Space exploration has fed our economy with much of what we now consider its most important recent innovations.

Digital cameras? Computer technology?

These things were NOT invented in the garages of private sector entrepeneurs.

They are the result of HUGE government spending, as are many of the life saving drugs we can't afford because we're afraid of seeming too much like Canada.

Especially in a terrible economic recession -- when the rich are NOT spending or hiring or investing -- government spending is keeping the economy's "animal spirits" moving to the extent that they still are.

The ability to draw distinctions is more important than many conservatives these days allow.

Oldefarte| 8.15.10 @ 2:36PM

Responses in CAPITALS:

"Pork" is generally what Congressman of the other party bring back to their districts[DUH, REALLY, THAT'S ABOUT AS INFORMATIVE AS A SCREEN DOOR IN A SUBMARINE]

Congress spends money. We are a huge, populous, powerful, wealthy, world power. The government can and must and will spend money. There's nothing inherently wrong with government spending[THE GOVERNMENT IS THE TAXPAYERS WHO SUPPLY THE MONEY/FUNDS THAT ARE SPENT]....Recently many Republicans -- rightly, to my mind -- have criticized Obama for defunding several ambitious programs at NASA. These programs, Republicans have reminded us, are not just beneficial to space exploration. Space exploration has fed our economy with much of what we now consider its most important recent innovations[THE MONEY WASTED FROM SPACE EXPLORATION IS THE MORONIC DREAMCHILD OF JFK AND HAS RESULTED IN ABSOLUTELY NOTHING BENEFICIAL FOR THE MONEY SPENT/WASTED ON SAME]....Digital cameras? Computer technology? These things were NOT invented in the garages of private sector entrepeneurs[GUESS AL BORE-GORE TOLD YOU THIS RIGHT? CAMERAS WER INVENTED BY PRIVATE COMPANIES LIKE KODAK, HP, ZEROX,ETC, NOT BY GOVERNMENT. GOVERNMENT DOESN'T PRODUCE/INVENT ANYTHING AND ONLY IS ADEPT AT TAXING THE INCOME MADE/EARNED BY PRIVATE CITIZENS/COMPANIES]....They are the result of HUGE government spending, as are many of the life saving drugs we can't afford because we're afraid of seeming too much like Canada [EVER HERE OF JONUS SALK, DUMMIE....YEA HE WORKDED FOR YOUR UNCLE SAM] ....Especially in a terrible economic recession -- when the rich are NOT spending or hiring or investing -- government spending is keeping the economy's "animal spirits" moving to the extent that they still are[YEA RIGHT DUMMIE, THE GOVERNMENT IS SPENDING ITS CITIZENS' MONEY WHO SUPPLIED SAME, NOT THEIR OWN. WHY? bECAUSE THE GOVERNMENT DOESN'T PRODUCE ANYTHING LIKE PRIVATE COMPANIES DO, AND OBTAIN THEIR FUNDS BY STEALING/TAXING OUR HARD EARNED MONEY IN ORDER TO SPEND IT ON GOVERNMENTAL WELFARE]!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Nate| 8.15.10 @ 4:05PM

Fart --

Most of your commentary doesn't merit response or attention.

Your notion that the space program was wasted spending is hilarious. Thinking of you sitting at a computer hooked up to the internet, probably imagining that the free market just sort of sponteneously generated such technology, is a good reminder why we need a better informed electorate.

Oldefarte| 8.16.10 @ 10:45AM

Nate, you are a MORON, but everyone here is aware of this. As the old saying goes, IGNORANCE IS BLISS [especially in your case, except that STUPIDITY is more the operative wording]. Oh, idiot, name ONE GOVERNMENT/PUBLIC EMPLOYEE/ENTITY/DEPARTMENT that created anything of value to human existence. It's one thing to be ignorant/stupid, but quite another to be actually proud of your obvious mental deficiencies. You are beyond stupid, you are the aftermath of an illegal ABORTION!!!!!!!!!

Nate| 8.15.10 @ 4:11PM

By the way, Fart. Rush Limbaugh constantly claims that "the government doesn't produced anything."

You've dutifully parotted that axiom in your attempted response above.

The only problem with that lame repetition is this:

It's not true.

The government produces plenty. The idea that it doesn't produce anything is totally ludicrous and false.

The government produced the military that won the greatest victory in all human history during WWII, for example.

When the government puts up a lighthouse to protect ships that engage in commerce, it produces something.

Here's a tip. Stop being such a fucking weasel. Stop listening to talk radio and repeating what you here there like a goddamned child.

If you're old, as your moniker suggests, ask why it is you grew old before growing wise. Ask why you can't stand up and be your own man and think for you own damn self.

Oldefarte| 8.16.10 @ 11:06AM

First of all I have an undergraduate degree in business [with a major in accounting and a minor in economics], and I worked for 35 years in PRIVATE industry before taking early retirement. What are your educational credentials, Nate? Did you make it out of the fifth grade, and if so, did you graduate from same or were you socially promoted by the inept public educational system? Oh, and as to Limbaugh, both he and his brother both are college graduates also [and his brother is a practicing attorney]. I am not repeating Limbaugh's words that government doesn't produce anything; but the fact is that anyone with brains cells [which obviously does not include you, Nate] knows this non-production FACT. Again, ignorance/stupidity is bliss [in your case]. Oh arswipe, as to your point of stupidity, the implied definition of PRODUCTION is one of economic/financial inference meaning MANUFACTURING [The US military does NOT MANUFACTURE ANYTHING, dummie]. Your lighthouse produced is another example of your stupidity since same lighthouse is not MANUFACTURED, but it is CONSTRUCTED. You're obviously too stupid to know the difference [and the military does not construct the lighthouse, but instead the pay/contract out the construction of same to PRIVATE CONTRACTORS that build same. Oh, and as to my age and weiselness, I'm man enough to KNOCK YOU ON YOUR ARS [and will gladly do so if ever given the opportunity, dimwit]!!!!!!!!

Mimi| 8.15.10 @ 8:05PM

Heh NATE you whipper-snapper...OLDEFARTE
pretty well knows his stuff! I'd say you would have to live a 1000 years to match him.
Look, He may not even be old, he,...may even be a girl. How would you or me ever know!
A Blogger named BIRDGIRL wrote the other day about about this gang in the whitehouse.
" Why did Clinton get involved in the
obama mess anyway? Its a wobbly administration about to go off the rails, why get involved with their over-heated machine. The're
out of control outlaws riding a runaway train toward a washed out bridge...shooting wildly at anything that moves" Most of the posters, would agree that write on this site....I do. Leave
OLDEFARTE alone if I were you....He may be the
Cowboy Sheriff in town out on the Prairie! How would you know? Have some respect lad!

C Bowen| 8.17.10 @ 4:34PM

"Congress Should Slow the Spending"

What bold talk from the geriatrics...are these memos suppose to be joke items? Where is the call to abolish the Department of Education, Energy, Commerce?